Discussion:
Need Data Recovery software for failing HDD
(too old to reply)
a***@internet.none
2017-09-29 05:26:07 UTC
Permalink
I have an old computer with two 120gb IDE HDDs. The first drive has 4
partitions C: thru F:. The second HDD has 3 partitions G: thru I:.
The computer is running Windows 98 SE. (Yea, I know this is a Windows 7
newsgroup, but the Win98 group is dead).

Anyhow, my G: partition has gone insane. This started when I was backing
it up, and it refused to copy some files. I ran scandisk and told me
there were 2 bad clusters, but could not fix them. Rather than just
marking them as BAD, it made the whole HDD go insane.
First it created several folders called DIR0000 DIR0001 etc.
Then I found several folders missing, but the contents of some of them
were in these DIR000X folders.

It told me to run the complete (long) version of Scandisk. I did it, and
after taking hours, it told me there were 2 bad clusters in UNUSED
spaces, and said they could not be fixed.

Rather than just mark them clusters bad, I Then found over half of my
folders missing. However, in DOS, I can see them, but found I can only
copy small files, large ones cause ABORT RETRY FAIL.

This partition is about 50gb, with 23gb used. It's formatted FAT32.
The entire drive is not bad. H: and I: work fine. Just G: is screwed up.

I have not run further tests, which might write to the drive. My goal is
to retrieve the very important data to another drive. (I only have about
half of that partition backed up). Once I can save the data, I plan to
also save the data on the other partitions, and will replace the drive
with a new one.

What can I use to retrieve the data?

Google told me to download PC Inspector. I tried it, it ran in Win98,
but everytime I go to G: it errors out.

What else is there? I'd prefer free, but will pay a reasonable fee for
something guaranteed to work.The lost data is around 12gb, but it's
extremely important. If I must, I will probably have to pay a pro for
data recovery.

Because this is a slave drive, I can plug it into a XP computer if need
be, but will need some special card or something, because that computer
has a SATA drive. I dont know if I am better trying to retrieve the data
using Win98 or XP????

I dont have any newer OSs, than XP.
Win98 is what I use the most, and this W98 computer has all my most
important data. I only use XP to play videos.
Paul
2017-09-29 08:31:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by a***@internet.none
I have an old computer with two 120gb IDE HDDs. The first drive has 4
partitions C: thru F:. The second HDD has 3 partitions G: thru I:.
The computer is running Windows 98 SE. (Yea, I know this is a Windows 7
newsgroup, but the Win98 group is dead).
Anyhow, my G: partition has gone insane. This started when I was backing
it up, and it refused to copy some files. I ran scandisk and told me
there were 2 bad clusters, but could not fix them. Rather than just
marking them as BAD, it made the whole HDD go insane.
First it created several folders called DIR0000 DIR0001 etc.
Then I found several folders missing, but the contents of some of them
were in these DIR000X folders.
It told me to run the complete (long) version of Scandisk. I did it, and
after taking hours, it told me there were 2 bad clusters in UNUSED
spaces, and said they could not be fixed.
Rather than just mark them clusters bad, I Then found over half of my
folders missing. However, in DOS, I can see them, but found I can only
copy small files, large ones cause ABORT RETRY FAIL.
This partition is about 50gb, with 23gb used. It's formatted FAT32.
The entire drive is not bad. H: and I: work fine. Just G: is screwed up.
I have not run further tests, which might write to the drive. My goal is
to retrieve the very important data to another drive. (I only have about
half of that partition backed up). Once I can save the data, I plan to
also save the data on the other partitions, and will replace the drive
with a new one.
What can I use to retrieve the data?
Google told me to download PC Inspector. I tried it, it ran in Win98,
but everytime I go to G: it errors out.
What else is there? I'd prefer free, but will pay a reasonable fee for
something guaranteed to work.The lost data is around 12gb, but it's
extremely important. If I must, I will probably have to pay a pro for
data recovery.
Because this is a slave drive, I can plug it into a XP computer if need
be, but will need some special card or something, because that computer
has a SATA drive. I dont know if I am better trying to retrieve the data
using Win98 or XP????
I dont have any newer OSs, than XP.
Win98 is what I use the most, and this W98 computer has all my most
important data. I only use XP to play videos.
ddrescue (Linux package "gddrescue") can clone a failing
drive to a new drive.

Then switching back to Windows, either Photorec or Recuva
can be used for file recovery. Copying the recovered files
to a separate drive.

That takes a total of two hard drives. One for the clone copy.
One for the recovered files. You do *not ever* try writing
to G: , the instant it shows trouble. And repair-in-place
utilities, can do more damage than they fix on a sick
drive.

And PC Inspector is the same as the free version of driverescue.
So there's no point trying that one.

I like to clone, as the first step, just in case the drive
is about to fail. I've had two Maxtor drives, that augered
into the ground in only 24 hours. They gave symptoms, then
within the next 24 hours, the drive would no longer ID. And
the neat thing was, one drive "lost" its ID in mid-flight.
It went from a 40GB drive to a 10GB drive, while I was
watching it.

http://www.cgsecurity.org/wiki/Damaged_Hard_Disk

# From a Linux LiveCD, use the package manager to install gddrescue

sudo ddrescue -n /dev/old_disk /dev/new_disk rescued.log

What happens on the first pass, is the program tries to copy
as many sectors as it can. The "rescued.log" file keeps
track of which sectors it got. Then, when you run a
command like this...

sudo ddrescue -r 1 /dev/old_disk /dev/new_disk rescued.log

it does one retry per failed sector (potentially a 15 second
delay comes from the disk when it tries to read a bad sector).
The rescued.log file tells the program which sectors are still
needed. So it's a gradual copy process, and the rescued.log
contains the status of the operation.

When you're sick of running the second command, then you
stop and do data recovery using /dev/new_disk. That's
when you run Photorec or Recuva, and transfer the
files to a second known-good disk drive.

A data recovery firm could have better luck, than an
attempted home recovery. And you have to weigh the
price of that, versus the value of the data. Professional
data recovery, you only pay if data is recovered. For
example, if I'd send my 2GB Barracuda drive, the one with
the big scratch in the platter, I wouldn't have had
to pay a dime :-( If a head falls off the head stack,
sometimes they can install a new head stack, and get
some data off. Yours doesn't have that problem, and
your problem is likely surface damage.

Note - the syntax of the above commands is for illustration
of the concept. Use

man ddrescue

to double check the syntax and then craft your command.

I don't know if anyone has ported ddrescue to Windows.
Environments like Cygwin, sometimes the people doing the
ports, have a lot of trouble doing low-level access to the
drives. And so expecting a port of a program like that. The
closest thing to drive cloning we have on Windows, is
this one. But this one is for cloning *healthy* disks.
The beauty of ddrescue, is getting a CRC error doesn't
stop it. It keeps trying. Many other utilities, will
exit on the first failure. Again, this is to illustrate
we do have utilities. But, we don't have everything
on Windows, and when you're desperate, you'll be
"shopping around" for stuff to do the work.

http://www.chrysocome.net/dd

I can count the number of times people have successfully
recovered data off a hard drive, on one hand. If you can
afford the data recovery company, and the data is important,
that's a better option. And a data recovery company cannot
perform miracles. For my 2GB Barracuda drive, with the
scratched platter, they can't "buff out the scratch".
It doesn't work that way. The gouge would ruin a new
head stack if one was installed, so even if they were
dumb enough to try, it would just fail to work. The
heads would be destroyed in about 10 revolutions of
the platter (heads load and "crunch" noise less
than a second later).

Paul
a***@internet.none
2017-09-29 09:12:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by Paul
Post by a***@internet.none
I have an old computer with two 120gb IDE HDDs. The first drive has 4
partitions C: thru F:. The second HDD has 3 partitions G: thru I:.
The computer is running Windows 98 SE. (Yea, I know this is a Windows 7
newsgroup, but the Win98 group is dead).
Anyhow, my G: partition has gone insane. This started when I was backing
it up, and it refused to copy some files. I ran scandisk and told me
there were 2 bad clusters, but could not fix them. Rather than just
marking them as BAD, it made the whole HDD go insane.
First it created several folders called DIR0000 DIR0001 etc.
Then I found several folders missing, but the contents of some of them
were in these DIR000X folders.
It told me to run the complete (long) version of Scandisk. I did it, and
after taking hours, it told me there were 2 bad clusters in UNUSED
spaces, and said they could not be fixed.
Rather than just mark them clusters bad, I Then found over half of my
folders missing. However, in DOS, I can see them, but found I can only
copy small files, large ones cause ABORT RETRY FAIL.
This partition is about 50gb, with 23gb used. It's formatted FAT32.
The entire drive is not bad. H: and I: work fine. Just G: is screwed up.
I have not run further tests, which might write to the drive. My goal is
to retrieve the very important data to another drive. (I only have about
half of that partition backed up). Once I can save the data, I plan to
also save the data on the other partitions, and will replace the drive
with a new one.
What can I use to retrieve the data?
Google told me to download PC Inspector. I tried it, it ran in Win98,
but everytime I go to G: it errors out.
What else is there? I'd prefer free, but will pay a reasonable fee for
something guaranteed to work.The lost data is around 12gb, but it's
extremely important. If I must, I will probably have to pay a pro for
data recovery.
Because this is a slave drive, I can plug it into a XP computer if need
be, but will need some special card or something, because that computer
has a SATA drive. I dont know if I am better trying to retrieve the data
using Win98 or XP????
I dont have any newer OSs, than XP.
Win98 is what I use the most, and this W98 computer has all my most
important data. I only use XP to play videos.
ddrescue (Linux package "gddrescue") can clone a failing
drive to a new drive.
Then switching back to Windows, either Photorec or Recuva
can be used for file recovery. Copying the recovered files
to a separate drive.
That takes a total of two hard drives. One for the clone copy.
One for the recovered files. You do *not ever* try writing
to G: , the instant it shows trouble. And repair-in-place
utilities, can do more damage than they fix on a sick
drive.
And PC Inspector is the same as the free version of driverescue.
So there's no point trying that one.
I like to clone, as the first step, just in case the drive
is about to fail. I've had two Maxtor drives, that augered
into the ground in only 24 hours. They gave symptoms, then
within the next 24 hours, the drive would no longer ID. And
the neat thing was, one drive "lost" its ID in mid-flight.
It went from a 40GB drive to a 10GB drive, while I was
watching it.
http://www.cgsecurity.org/wiki/Damaged_Hard_Disk
# From a Linux LiveCD, use the package manager to install gddrescue
sudo ddrescue -n /dev/old_disk /dev/new_disk rescued.log
What happens on the first pass, is the program tries to copy
as many sectors as it can. The "rescued.log" file keeps
track of which sectors it got. Then, when you run a
command like this...
sudo ddrescue -r 1 /dev/old_disk /dev/new_disk rescued.log
it does one retry per failed sector (potentially a 15 second
delay comes from the disk when it tries to read a bad sector).
The rescued.log file tells the program which sectors are still
needed. So it's a gradual copy process, and the rescued.log
contains the status of the operation.
When you're sick of running the second command, then you
stop and do data recovery using /dev/new_disk. That's
when you run Photorec or Recuva, and transfer the
files to a second known-good disk drive.
A data recovery firm could have better luck, than an
attempted home recovery. And you have to weigh the
price of that, versus the value of the data. Professional
data recovery, you only pay if data is recovered. For
example, if I'd send my 2GB Barracuda drive, the one with
the big scratch in the platter, I wouldn't have had
to pay a dime :-( If a head falls off the head stack,
sometimes they can install a new head stack, and get
some data off. Yours doesn't have that problem, and
your problem is likely surface damage.
Note - the syntax of the above commands is for illustration
of the concept. Use
man ddrescue
to double check the syntax and then craft your command.
I don't know if anyone has ported ddrescue to Windows.
Environments like Cygwin, sometimes the people doing the
ports, have a lot of trouble doing low-level access to the
drives. And so expecting a port of a program like that. The
closest thing to drive cloning we have on Windows, is
this one. But this one is for cloning *healthy* disks.
The beauty of ddrescue, is getting a CRC error doesn't
stop it. It keeps trying. Many other utilities, will
exit on the first failure. Again, this is to illustrate
we do have utilities. But, we don't have everything
on Windows, and when you're desperate, you'll be
"shopping around" for stuff to do the work.
http://www.chrysocome.net/dd
I can count the number of times people have successfully
recovered data off a hard drive, on one hand. If you can
afford the data recovery company, and the data is important,
that's a better option. And a data recovery company cannot
perform miracles. For my 2GB Barracuda drive, with the
scratched platter, they can't "buff out the scratch".
It doesn't work that way. The gouge would ruin a new
head stack if one was installed, so even if they were
dumb enough to try, it would just fail to work. The
heads would be destroyed in about 10 revolutions of
the platter (heads load and "crunch" noise less
than a second later).
Paul
I can understand the reason to copy the partition. I am not sure of
using the linux stuff. My experience with linux is 99% failure. Meaning
I have used a simple bootable linux such as Puppy or the older versions
of PcLinux to boot from a USB thumb drive and retrieve the files from a
drive which XP refused to bootup. (usually when the motherboard died and
I had to plug the HDD into another computer). 100% of all newer versions
of linux will not bootup, even on a much newer computer.

And when it comes to using the linux command line, I may as well attempt
to do brain surgery on myself.

On top of that, I am working with a computer from 2000. I have upgraded
it to the max allowed RAM, and done other upgrades, but it still lacks
much as far as USB support.

Of course, since this is a slave drive, I can connect it to another
computer (If I had one that supports IDE drives). My newer XP machine
has SATA drives.

But I do have a few unused older computers that may be a little more
robust.

Now, I do have Partition Magic (PM) installed. I opened it and ran it on
that partition, to check for errors. It says Error 50, can not read.
PM does have an option to Copy a Partition. I would have already tried
that, except I dont have another partition on the first (good drive) to
copy to. However, I do have another drive that I could install Win98 to,
and install PM on it, and copy to that drive.

I should note that my G: partition is around 50gb, and has 23gb of data
on it. Yet, PM shows it as FULL.

Then too, is it possible to install a 3rd HDD? There is the CDrom cable,
and that CD drive has not worked in years (I dont need it). Can I
connect a 3rd drive to that cable?

One other thing. While looking thru all the software I have installed, I
noticed that I have Norton Utilities. That was made for Windows 9.x.
It's been installed for years, and I have never used it much. But I ran
it, and ran "Norton Disk Doctor". I got the following results. Each of
these steps gave me the option to fix the partition, but I did NOT let
it do the fixes. (Dont want to write to the disk). But I did write down
the error results. Here they are:

--
Invalid Disk table in boot record

Error reading a sector in the FAT

The FAT has a bad sector

Error building the directory structure (error reading the FAT unable to
analyze the directory structure)
--

What's odd, is that this ENTIRE drive dont seem to be failing, just that
G: partition. Partitions H: and I: work fine on that same drive. But I
do want to back them up quickly too.

Lastly, here is the entire Scandisk.log for that partition:

--
*******************

Microsoft ScanDisk for Windows

NOTE: If you use an MS-DOS program to view this file, some of the
characters
may appear incorrectly. Use a Windows program such as Notepad instead.

Log file generated at 03:08 on 9/27/2017.

ScanDisk used the following options:
Standard test
Automatically fix errors

Drive G_120 (G:) contained the following errors:

Error reading a system area sector on this drive.
The disk is seriously damaged.
Resolution: Retry the read

Error reading a system area sector on this drive.
The disk is seriously damaged.
Resolution: Cancel ScanDisk

ScanDisk restarted so it could perform a thorough test.

-------------------

Drive G_120 (G:) contained the following errors:

Error reading your drive.
ScanDisk may have corrected this error when it performed a surface scan.
However, other errors may remain on your drive.
Resolution: Retry the read

Error reading your drive.
ScanDisk may have corrected this error when it performed a surface scan.
However, other errors may remain on your drive.
Resolution: Ignore this error and continue
Results: Error was not corrected.

ScanDisk could not properly read from or write to cluster 57856.
This cluster is currently unused.
Resolution: Repair the error
Results: Error was corrected as specified above.

ScanDisk could not properly read from or write to cluster 135122.
This cluster is currently unused.
Resolution: Repair the error
Results: Error was not corrected.
Results: Correction failed

ScanDisk found errors on this drive but did not fix all of them.

-------------------

One last question. How does a person find a "data recovery firm". Unless
the cost is super expensive, I'd consider doing that. If they could just
recover two folders (with lots of sub folders), I'd be happy. Almost
everything else on that partition I have on my last backup. I probably
have 8 to 10gb that needs to be recovered.

Comment:
From now on, I will be backing up more often!!!!
Paul
2017-09-29 10:54:20 UTC
Permalink
Post by a***@internet.none
Post by Paul
Post by a***@internet.none
I have an old computer with two 120gb IDE HDDs. The first drive has 4
partitions C: thru F:. The second HDD has 3 partitions G: thru I:.
The computer is running Windows 98 SE. (Yea, I know this is a Windows 7
newsgroup, but the Win98 group is dead).
Anyhow, my G: partition has gone insane. This started when I was backing
it up, and it refused to copy some files. I ran scandisk and told me
there were 2 bad clusters, but could not fix them. Rather than just
marking them as BAD, it made the whole HDD go insane.
First it created several folders called DIR0000 DIR0001 etc.
Then I found several folders missing, but the contents of some of them
were in these DIR000X folders.
It told me to run the complete (long) version of Scandisk. I did it, and
after taking hours, it told me there were 2 bad clusters in UNUSED
spaces, and said they could not be fixed.
Rather than just mark them clusters bad, I Then found over half of my
folders missing. However, in DOS, I can see them, but found I can only
copy small files, large ones cause ABORT RETRY FAIL.
This partition is about 50gb, with 23gb used. It's formatted FAT32.
The entire drive is not bad. H: and I: work fine. Just G: is screwed up.
I have not run further tests, which might write to the drive. My goal is
to retrieve the very important data to another drive. (I only have about
half of that partition backed up). Once I can save the data, I plan to
also save the data on the other partitions, and will replace the drive
with a new one.
What can I use to retrieve the data?
Google told me to download PC Inspector. I tried it, it ran in Win98,
but everytime I go to G: it errors out.
What else is there? I'd prefer free, but will pay a reasonable fee for
something guaranteed to work.The lost data is around 12gb, but it's
extremely important. If I must, I will probably have to pay a pro for
data recovery.
Because this is a slave drive, I can plug it into a XP computer if need
be, but will need some special card or something, because that computer
has a SATA drive. I dont know if I am better trying to retrieve the data
using Win98 or XP????
I dont have any newer OSs, than XP.
Win98 is what I use the most, and this W98 computer has all my most
important data. I only use XP to play videos.
ddrescue (Linux package "gddrescue") can clone a failing
drive to a new drive.
Then switching back to Windows, either Photorec or Recuva
can be used for file recovery. Copying the recovered files
to a separate drive.
That takes a total of two hard drives. One for the clone copy.
One for the recovered files. You do *not ever* try writing
to G: , the instant it shows trouble. And repair-in-place
utilities, can do more damage than they fix on a sick
drive.
And PC Inspector is the same as the free version of driverescue.
So there's no point trying that one.
I like to clone, as the first step, just in case the drive
is about to fail. I've had two Maxtor drives, that augered
into the ground in only 24 hours. They gave symptoms, then
within the next 24 hours, the drive would no longer ID. And
the neat thing was, one drive "lost" its ID in mid-flight.
It went from a 40GB drive to a 10GB drive, while I was
watching it.
http://www.cgsecurity.org/wiki/Damaged_Hard_Disk
# From a Linux LiveCD, use the package manager to install gddrescue
sudo ddrescue -n /dev/old_disk /dev/new_disk rescued.log
What happens on the first pass, is the program tries to copy
as many sectors as it can. The "rescued.log" file keeps
track of which sectors it got. Then, when you run a
command like this...
sudo ddrescue -r 1 /dev/old_disk /dev/new_disk rescued.log
it does one retry per failed sector (potentially a 15 second
delay comes from the disk when it tries to read a bad sector).
The rescued.log file tells the program which sectors are still
needed. So it's a gradual copy process, and the rescued.log
contains the status of the operation.
When you're sick of running the second command, then you
stop and do data recovery using /dev/new_disk. That's
when you run Photorec or Recuva, and transfer the
files to a second known-good disk drive.
A data recovery firm could have better luck, than an
attempted home recovery. And you have to weigh the
price of that, versus the value of the data. Professional
data recovery, you only pay if data is recovered. For
example, if I'd send my 2GB Barracuda drive, the one with
the big scratch in the platter, I wouldn't have had
to pay a dime :-( If a head falls off the head stack,
sometimes they can install a new head stack, and get
some data off. Yours doesn't have that problem, and
your problem is likely surface damage.
Note - the syntax of the above commands is for illustration
of the concept. Use
man ddrescue
to double check the syntax and then craft your command.
I don't know if anyone has ported ddrescue to Windows.
Environments like Cygwin, sometimes the people doing the
ports, have a lot of trouble doing low-level access to the
drives. And so expecting a port of a program like that. The
closest thing to drive cloning we have on Windows, is
this one. But this one is for cloning *healthy* disks.
The beauty of ddrescue, is getting a CRC error doesn't
stop it. It keeps trying. Many other utilities, will
exit on the first failure. Again, this is to illustrate
we do have utilities. But, we don't have everything
on Windows, and when you're desperate, you'll be
"shopping around" for stuff to do the work.
http://www.chrysocome.net/dd
I can count the number of times people have successfully
recovered data off a hard drive, on one hand. If you can
afford the data recovery company, and the data is important,
that's a better option. And a data recovery company cannot
perform miracles. For my 2GB Barracuda drive, with the
scratched platter, they can't "buff out the scratch".
It doesn't work that way. The gouge would ruin a new
head stack if one was installed, so even if they were
dumb enough to try, it would just fail to work. The
heads would be destroyed in about 10 revolutions of
the platter (heads load and "crunch" noise less
than a second later).
Paul
I can understand the reason to copy the partition. I am not sure of
using the linux stuff. My experience with linux is 99% failure. Meaning
I have used a simple bootable linux such as Puppy or the older versions
of PcLinux to boot from a USB thumb drive and retrieve the files from a
drive which XP refused to bootup. (usually when the motherboard died and
I had to plug the HDD into another computer). 100% of all newer versions
of linux will not bootup, even on a much newer computer.
And when it comes to using the linux command line, I may as well attempt
to do brain surgery on myself.
On top of that, I am working with a computer from 2000. I have upgraded
it to the max allowed RAM, and done other upgrades, but it still lacks
much as far as USB support.
Of course, since this is a slave drive, I can connect it to another
computer (If I had one that supports IDE drives). My newer XP machine
has SATA drives.
But I do have a few unused older computers that may be a little more
robust.
Now, I do have Partition Magic (PM) installed. I opened it and ran it on
that partition, to check for errors. It says Error 50, can not read.
PM does have an option to Copy a Partition. I would have already tried
that, except I dont have another partition on the first (good drive) to
copy to. However, I do have another drive that I could install Win98 to,
and install PM on it, and copy to that drive.
I should note that my G: partition is around 50gb, and has 23gb of data
on it. Yet, PM shows it as FULL.
Then too, is it possible to install a 3rd HDD? There is the CDrom cable,
and that CD drive has not worked in years (I dont need it). Can I
connect a 3rd drive to that cable?
One other thing. While looking thru all the software I have installed, I
noticed that I have Norton Utilities. That was made for Windows 9.x.
It's been installed for years, and I have never used it much. But I ran
it, and ran "Norton Disk Doctor". I got the following results. Each of
these steps gave me the option to fix the partition, but I did NOT let
it do the fixes. (Dont want to write to the disk). But I did write down
--
Invalid Disk table in boot record
Error reading a sector in the FAT
The FAT has a bad sector
Error building the directory structure (error reading the FAT unable to
analyze the directory structure)
--
What's odd, is that this ENTIRE drive dont seem to be failing, just that
G: partition. Partitions H: and I: work fine on that same drive. But I
do want to back them up quickly too.
--
*******************
Microsoft ScanDisk for Windows
NOTE: If you use an MS-DOS program to view this file, some of the
characters
may appear incorrectly. Use a Windows program such as Notepad instead.
Log file generated at 03:08 on 9/27/2017.
Standard test
Automatically fix errors
Error reading a system area sector on this drive.
The disk is seriously damaged.
Resolution: Retry the read
Error reading a system area sector on this drive.
The disk is seriously damaged.
Resolution: Cancel ScanDisk
ScanDisk restarted so it could perform a thorough test.
-------------------
Error reading your drive.
ScanDisk may have corrected this error when it performed a surface scan.
However, other errors may remain on your drive.
Resolution: Retry the read
Error reading your drive.
ScanDisk may have corrected this error when it performed a surface scan.
However, other errors may remain on your drive.
Resolution: Ignore this error and continue
Results: Error was not corrected.
ScanDisk could not properly read from or write to cluster 57856.
This cluster is currently unused.
Resolution: Repair the error
Results: Error was corrected as specified above.
ScanDisk could not properly read from or write to cluster 135122.
This cluster is currently unused.
Resolution: Repair the error
Results: Error was not corrected.
Results: Correction failed
ScanDisk found errors on this drive but did not fix all of them.
-------------------
One last question. How does a person find a "data recovery firm". Unless
the cost is super expensive, I'd consider doing that. If they could just
recover two folders (with lots of sub folders), I'd be happy. Almost
everything else on that partition I have on my last backup. I probably
have 8 to 10gb that needs to be recovered.
From now on, I will be backing up more often!!!!
If your motherboard has the two IDE connectors, you can
connect four IDE hard drives maximum.

Ribbon cables come in two types. 40 wire and 80 wire.
The 80 wire ones, every second wire is a ground wire,
and that enhances electrical transmission. The 80 wire
cable supports UDMA modes. The CDROM drive could be using
a 40 wire cable (as the data transfer rate doesn't have
to go very high on a CD). If I was fitting hard drives
on my second IDE connector, I would use the 80 wire cable.
The wires on the 80 wire cable are "thinner", and that's
a quick visual check of the cable type. When you look
at the CDROM cable, you'll probably notice the difference.

Drives have Master/Slave/Cable_Select for jumpering.

If you're moving your Slave drive to the second cable,
put the first drive installed, on the end connector of
the cable. It's natural in that case, to switch the
drive to Master in that situation. If you install two
drives on the new cable, it doesn't matter then whether
Master is the middle one or the end one. But in natural
fill order, you put your first drive as Master on the
end, and if you add a second drive, it becomes Slave
in the middle.

As long as you use 80 wire cables, the wiring within the
cable is set up for Cable_Select. In which case, you still
fill the end connector first (when putting just one
drive on the cable), but you no longer care about
fiddling with the jumpers. So you can use CS/CS for
two drives installed on the new cable.

*******

I have no idea how good these people are:

http://www.seagate.com/ca/en/services-software/recover/

The thing is, Seagate doesn't have to do the work itself.
It could "sell" the service to a third-party, and take
a cut for promotion of the service.

But, when I need an example of "how do I find a data
recovery company", that's an "example".

There are likely to be "tiers" of companies. For example,
some directory I was looking at, claimed I had "two
data recovery companies" in my city. Now, obviously,
these are just a hole in the wall, and the dude there
just mails your drive to another company, and
takes his cut...

A real data recovery company has a clean room. If
I was starting my own operation, I would buy a
glove box with a hepafilter and positive air
pressure. But I might be hard-pressed to do a
head stack in a contraption like that. Seagate
might use an "air curtain", which is a means
of segregating a non Class 10 part of a room,
from the "clean part". When someone claims to
have a Class 10 facility, it could be little
better than a "plastic outhouse" :-)

If you search in the right place, you're going
to find that directory that I found, and there
are way too many entries in it, to vet them.

That's just to give you some idea, how they'll
be tripping all over themselves to get your money.

In my case, I would not likely select my "local"
entries for the job, as I can mail a drive somewhere
just as easily as anyone else. In many cases, data
recovery can be done without opening the HDA
(i.e. simple undelete run, for people who
deleted everything in their trash bin). But if
you want an assurance of "full service", then
the operator has to have a clean room or glove
box, to have half a chance of doing a head
stack or whatever.

There was a company in India, that sold all sorts
of "toys" for working on drives. It probably wouldn't
cost much to get into the business, which is why
there are so many entries in the directory for them.

There is even a web site where these people converse
with one another, and exchange "tips". And they
wouldn't give you the time of day, if you tried
to get free advice :-) And that site is global,
and many of the people are ESL - you're dealing
with a wide cross section, if viewing the posts
there.

It's about as reputable as "roof repair" in your
phone book :-)

Paul
a***@internet.none
2017-09-29 15:49:33 UTC
Permalink
Post by Paul
If your motherboard has the two IDE connectors, you can
connect four IDE hard drives maximum.
Ribbon cables come in two types. 40 wire and 80 wire.
The 80 wire ones, every second wire is a ground wire,
and that enhances electrical transmission. The 80 wire
cable supports UDMA modes. The CDROM drive could be using
a 40 wire cable (as the data transfer rate doesn't have
to go very high on a CD). If I was fitting hard drives
on my second IDE connector, I would use the 80 wire cable.
The wires on the 80 wire cable are "thinner", and that's
a quick visual check of the cable type. When you look
at the CDROM cable, you'll probably notice the difference.
My HDDs and the cable that used to go to the CD drive are both 40 wire
ones. That is how the computer was made. I dont recall seeing the 80
wire ones back in the early days. This computer was made with Win 2000
installed. As soon as I got itm I installed Win98se, on C:. THen
installed Win2000 as secondary boot on D:. I never boot to W2000, except
to do backups, because W98 wont read my large external USB drives.(500gb
and 1tb portable drives).

Just for the record, my problem partition G: is not seen at all under
Win2000. It just says "this partition needs to be formatted".

My backups have always been just plain copies. I copy the entire
partition to my portable drives. That has always worked fine, unless
something errors out and causes the copy process to stop. That normally
dont happen, except to try to copy the WINDOWS folder. I can copy my
Win98 folders though, when I am booted to W2000. I do however delete the
Swap file before copying.

I have done this for decades and it always worked fine. The important
data I am missing is mostly electronic schematics and manuals. Some are
near impossible to replace. I dont need a newer OS to use that stuff,
and I have always felt safer having data on a Win98 machine, and using
FAT. I've had XP fail numerous times, and the HDDs cant just be plugged
into another computer, and expect XP to run. Win98 can be transferred to
another computer quite easily, with only a few drivers added. I've also
felt safer using FAT, versus NTFS, because FAT can always be accessed
from DOS. However, in this case, that is not helping.

Either way, I plan to install a 3rd HDD, now that I know I can. I may
first have to go on ebay and order a few drives, although I think I may
have a working 80gb drive in my spare parts. I know I have a few 40gb or
smaller, but to copy that entire partition, I need no smaller than 50gb.
I just ordered a brand new 120gb to replace this failing one. It was not
expensive, so I may just order another one, or an 80 or something like
that.

Thanks for the help from all who have helped.
J. P. Gilliver (John)
2017-09-29 18:41:55 UTC
Permalink
In message <***@4ax.com>,
***@internet.none writes:
[]
Post by a***@internet.none
Just for the record, my problem partition G: is not seen at all under
Win2000. It just says "this partition needs to be formatted".
(Did it see it before it went wrong?)
Post by a***@internet.none
My backups have always been just plain copies. I copy the entire
partition to my portable drives. That has always worked fine, unless
It will, for 98 and earlier; it won't for XP (well, it will for other
than the system disc).
Post by a***@internet.none
something errors out and causes the copy process to stop. That normally
That's always been my bugbear with the copy process. I use SyncToy,
which I _think_ will carry on after a hiccup, though I'm not sure.
(Don't know if it works on '98 though.) [It also - as it's name hints -
only copies changed files, so is a lot quicker.]
Post by a***@internet.none
dont happen, except to try to copy the WINDOWS folder. I can copy my
Win98 folders though, when I am booted to W2000. I do however delete the
Swap file before copying.
I have done this for decades and it always worked fine. The important
data I am missing is mostly electronic schematics and manuals. Some are
near impossible to replace. I dont need a newer OS to use that stuff,
(All that you've acquired since the last backup?)
Post by a***@internet.none
and I have always felt safer having data on a Win98 machine, and using
FAT. I've had XP fail numerous times, and the HDDs cant just be plugged
into another computer, and expect XP to run. Win98 can be transferred to
That's why I image it (my main system is XP). I use Macrium 5, which I
boot from a mini-CD. (It has drivers for external [USB - well, it can do
network too, though I've not tried that] drives, and works fine with my
1 TB one.) The process, as you'd expect, takes no longer than a copy
would.
Post by a***@internet.none
another computer quite easily, with only a few drivers added. I've also
felt safer using FAT, versus NTFS, because FAT can always be accessed
from DOS. However, in this case, that is not helping.
I too feel that way about FAT versus NTFS. (However, apart from a disc
dying, I've not had XP crash for years, and that may have _something_ to
do with it being on NTFS.)
Post by a***@internet.none
Either way, I plan to install a 3rd HDD, now that I know I can. I may
(You could even add it without removing the CD, by making one master and
one slave, though if as I think you've said the CD is faulty, you might
as well remove it at the same time.)
Post by a***@internet.none
first have to go on ebay and order a few drives, although I think I may
have a working 80gb drive in my spare parts. I know I have a few 40gb or
smaller, but to copy that entire partition, I need no smaller than 50gb.
I just ordered a brand new 120gb to replace this failing one. It was not
I didn't know you could still get new EIDE drives! Are you sure it's
new? Either way, might still be worth checking its SMART readout (using
a USB-EIDE cable-and-power-supply from your XP computer) before
committing to it.
Post by a***@internet.none
expensive, so I may just order another one, or an 80 or something like
that.
Thanks for the help from all who have helped.
Do tell us how you get on!
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)***@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

You can be tough without being rude - Nick Clegg, 2014 July
Paul
2017-09-29 19:26:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
Post by a***@internet.none
My backups have always been just plain copies. I copy the entire
partition to my portable drives. That has always worked fine, unless
It will, for 98 and earlier; it won't for XP (well, it will for other
than the system disc).
It will for WinXP too.

Caveats:

1) WinXP installed on FAT32.
2) FAT32 prepared with Ridgecrop formatter, so you can
have any sized partition you want up to 2TB.
3) After you copy the files back, you must boot the
WinXP installer CD and do "fixboot". Since formatting
the partition wipes the boot block, and any time
you copy the files off your FAT32 WinXP, you would
normally be formatting "for best results".

So it's

a) Boot your maintenance OS
b) Format the former C: partition to FAT32 again (Ridgecrop)
c) Copy the files back (I use Robocopy and a single command
does the whole partition).
d) Shut down. Boot the WinXP installer CD. Do "fixboot".
3) Shut down the CD. Boot from the nice fresh FAT32 C: WinXP on HDD

And that is the OS I'm typing this on.

FAT32 has a 4GB max file size, so working your WinXP
is "not for the squeamish". Don't start a download
in Firefox, and then act surprised when it errors out
at 4GB+1byte :-) I've actually done that.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D%27oh!

HTH,
Paul
Char Jackson
2017-09-29 21:44:02 UTC
Permalink
Post by Paul
Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
Post by a***@internet.none
My backups have always been just plain copies. I copy the entire
partition to my portable drives. That has always worked fine, unless
It will, for 98 and earlier; it won't for XP (well, it will for other
than the system disc).
It will for WinXP too.
1) WinXP installed on FAT32.
2) FAT32 prepared with Ridgecrop formatter, so you can
have any sized partition you want up to 2TB.
3) After you copy the files back, you must boot the
WinXP installer CD and do "fixboot". Since formatting
the partition wipes the boot block, and any time
you copy the files off your FAT32 WinXP, you would
normally be formatting "for best results".
So it's
a) Boot your maintenance OS
b) Format the former C: partition to FAT32 again (Ridgecrop)
c) Copy the files back (I use Robocopy and a single command
does the whole partition).
d) Shut down. Boot the WinXP installer CD. Do "fixboot".
3) Shut down the CD. Boot from the nice fresh FAT32 C: WinXP on HDD
And that is the OS I'm typing this on.
FAT32 has a 4GB max file size, so working your WinXP
is "not for the squeamish". Don't start a download
in Firefox, and then act surprised when it errors out
at 4GB+1byte :-) I've actually done that.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D%27oh!
I assume you meant to write "4GB-1byte" ;-)
4GB is one byte too big for FAT32, so 4GB+1 is too big by two bytes.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File_Allocation_Table

Max. file size 4,294,967,295 bytes (4 GiB – 1) with FAT16B and FAT32[1]
--
Char Jackson
a***@internet.none
2017-10-03 08:07:39 UTC
Permalink
On Fri, 29 Sep 2017 19:41:55 +0100, "J. P. Gilliver (John)"
Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
[]
Post by a***@internet.none
Just for the record, my problem partition G: is not seen at all under
Win2000. It just says "this partition needs to be formatted".
(Did it see it before it went wrong?)
Yes, along with all my other partitions.
I only use 120gb drives because Win98 cant access any larger. But two of
them is all I need. I have 7 partitions total, and each has it's
purpose. Unfortunately G: is the one that failed and the one that is
strictly storage.
Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
Post by a***@internet.none
My backups have always been just plain copies. I copy the entire
partition to my portable drives. That has always worked fine, unless
It will, for 98 and earlier; it won't for XP (well, it will for other
than the system disc).
Post by a***@internet.none
something errors out and causes the copy process to stop. That normally
That's always been my bugbear with the copy process. I use SyncToy,
which I _think_ will carry on after a hiccup, though I'm not sure.
(Don't know if it works on '98 though.) [It also - as it's name hints -
only copies changed files, so is a lot quicker.]
Yea, I never understood why MS made the copy process stop. All it needs
to do is post a notice at the end saying file**** was not copied. Once I
had a saved website, and the default filename of that website exceeded
the long filename size limit. Every time I tried to copy files, it would
stop at that file. Talk about annoying. It took hours to figure out
which file was the faulty one. Then it would not allow me to rename it.
I finally deleted it using Dos.

Lesson learned, I always check filenames when saving a website now. Some
are insanely long. I manually trim them before saving them now.
Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
Post by a***@internet.none
dont happen, except to try to copy the WINDOWS folder. I can copy my
Win98 folders though, when I am booted to W2000. I do however delete the
Swap file before copying.
I have done this for decades and it always worked fine. The important
data I am missing is mostly electronic schematics and manuals. Some are
near impossible to replace. I dont need a newer OS to use that stuff,
(All that you've acquired since the last backup?)
Yes, last backup was May 2017. I have about 20% of it on that backup.
Everything else was added since.
Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
Post by a***@internet.none
and I have always felt safer having data on a Win98 machine, and using
FAT. I've had XP fail numerous times, and the HDDs cant just be plugged
into another computer, and expect XP to run. Win98 can be transferred to
That's why I image it (my main system is XP). I use Macrium 5, which I
boot from a mini-CD. (It has drivers for external [USB - well, it can do
network too, though I've not tried that] drives, and works fine with my
1 TB one.) The process, as you'd expect, takes no longer than a copy
would.
Post by a***@internet.none
another computer quite easily, with only a few drivers added. I've also
felt safer using FAT, versus NTFS, because FAT can always be accessed
from DOS. However, in this case, that is not helping.
I too feel that way about FAT versus NTFS. (However, apart from a disc
dying, I've not had XP crash for years, and that may have _something_ to
do with it being on NTFS.)
Post by a***@internet.none
Either way, I plan to install a 3rd HDD, now that I know I can. I may
(You could even add it without removing the CD, by making one master and
one slave, though if as I think you've said the CD is faulty, you might
as well remove it at the same time.)
That CD drive was unplugged years ago. I didn't remove the dead drive,
just unplugged the data and power cables. But the cable is still in the
computer, doing nothing.
Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
Post by a***@internet.none
first have to go on ebay and order a few drives, although I think I may
have a working 80gb drive in my spare parts. I know I have a few 40gb or
smaller, but to copy that entire partition, I need no smaller than 50gb.
I just ordered a brand new 120gb to replace this failing one. It was not
I didn't know you could still get new EIDE drives! Are you sure it's
new? Either way, might still be worth checking its SMART readout (using
a USB-EIDE cable-and-power-supply from your XP computer) before
committing to it.
Yes it's new. Ebay has everything..... The 120gb is new, but I also
bought a 160gb used one. It was so cheap I could not pass it up, and
guaranteed to work. I figure I can plug that one on one of my XP
machines and try to duplicate this defective one, before I mess with it.
Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
Post by a***@internet.none
expensive, so I may just order another one, or an 80 or something like
that.
Thanks for the help from all who have helped.
Do tell us how you get on!
J. P. Gilliver (John)
2017-10-03 13:15:40 UTC
Permalink
In message <***@4ax.com>,
***@internet.none writes:
[]
Post by a***@internet.none
I only use 120gb drives because Win98 cant access any larger. But two of
Ah, right.
[]
Post by a***@internet.none
Yea, I never understood why MS made the copy process stop. All it needs
to do is post a notice at the end saying file**** was not copied. Once I
Or it could stop to tell you (that would avoid it having to store up a
potentially long list of fails), but at least carry on when you click
OK. Stopping the copy is indeed infuriating, as you don't know what it
has copied and what it hasn't, since it probably does it in a different
order than you would. But we're stuck with it.
Post by a***@internet.none
had a saved website, and the default filename of that website exceeded
the long filename size limit. Every time I tried to copy files, it would
stop at that file. Talk about annoying. It took hours to figure out
which file was the faulty one. Then it would not allow me to rename it.
I finally deleted it using Dos.
Interesting that you could create it in the first place: obviously
whatever you are using to save websites isn't aware of the limit.
[]
Post by a***@internet.none
Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
Post by a***@internet.none
data I am missing is mostly electronic schematics and manuals. Some are
near impossible to replace. I dont need a newer OS to use that stuff,
(All that you've acquired since the last backup?)
Yes, last backup was May 2017. I have about 20% of it on that backup.
Everything else was added since.
You've already mentioned that you've decided you'll be backing up more
often now (-:. I know the problem ... [I'm curious: what are they
schematics and manuals _of/for_? Especially that they're nearly
irreplaceable?]
[]
Post by a***@internet.none
Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
(You could even add it without removing the CD, by making one master and
one slave, though if as I think you've said the CD is faulty, you might
as well remove it at the same time.)
That CD drive was unplugged years ago. I didn't remove the dead drive,
just unplugged the data and power cables. But the cable is still in the
computer, doing nothing.
You'll need somewhere to _physically_ put the third drive - if you don't
have space in the existing drive cage for it, maybe where the CD drive
was will do, with a suitable adapter. (I did that on a friend's one
recently, where he'd upgraded to a motherboard that didn't have IDE, and
the old ZIP drive - which was in such an adapter - was thus redundant.
The adapter fitted a HD fine.)
[]
Post by a***@internet.none
Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
I didn't know you could still get new EIDE drives! Are you sure it's
new? Either way, might still be worth checking its SMART readout (using
a USB-EIDE cable-and-power-supply from your XP computer) before
committing to it.
Yes it's new. Ebay has everything..... The 120gb is new, but I also
bought a 160gb used one. It was so cheap I could not pass it up, and
guaranteed to work. I figure I can plug that one on one of my XP
machines and try to duplicate this defective one, before I mess with it.
Sounds like a plan. However, I'd make quite sure it _is_ working first,
regardless of the guarantee - all the guarantee will do is get you your
money back, not all the time you've wasted playing with it. Assuming you
can find an IDE socket on the motherboard of one of your XP machines,
run that utility I suggested on it - at least twice, ideally a few days
apart, then it will tell you if the SMART parameters are deteriorating
(and give you a predicted failure date if they are, though it may be
next century!). That only looks at the SMART data of course: there's
also one which Paul often recommends that draws a curve of how the
access speed varies across the disc (that's what it's designed for, and
is reflected in its name); this should give a smooth curve (HDs are
fastest near the start), with a few spikes downwards where XP was doing
something else for a moment while it was measuring. If any of those
spikes have appreciable width, it's a bad patch on the drive. (Or if
they're always in the same place on successive runs.)

Obviously running those - the SMART utility and the speed one - on your
failing drive would be interesting too, though it sounds as if it
definitely has a pimple.
[]
Post by a***@internet.none
Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
Do tell us how you get on!
(I've added the '98 'group in.)
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)***@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

The fifth bestselling detail of all time: the Ford Transit. (RT/C4 2015-5-24.)
a***@internet.none
2017-10-04 06:04:28 UTC
Permalink
After being told about this program to assist in doing the cloning and
data recovery of my failed HDD, I did some looking up ddrescue. All I am
seeing is the Linux version, and worse yet, it requires doing it by the
command line. To me, this means I may as well just toss my failed drive
in the garbage and say goodbye to my data. I have never had any luck
with anything Linux, and if it involves the Linux command line, it's
time to "hang up the phone". On top of that, it appears that to even run
this thing means it needs to be burned to a DVD. That means I will first
have to buy a DVD burner, and blank media. NO THANKS!!!! (That DVD
burner would proably never be used again).

I cant believe there is not something similar that runs in Windows, or
even from Dos, which is just as good. I prefer to stay away from Linux
as far as possible. I will run anything that works on Win9x or WinXP, or
even DOS. (I am not afraid to use Dos command lines, because I was
raised on Dos).

So, what else is there? I'll even purchase commercial software if it's
not over $50. But what do I use?

I just cant believe there is nothing that runs on Windows or Dos, and
think it's sort of ridiculous to have to use Linux to fix a Windows
drive.

---

One other thing, according to Norton Disk Doctor (for Win9x), the FAT
table is defective. There is supposed to be a second copy of the FAT
table, How can I swap to the second copy, and is it possible to swap
back if that dont work?


Yes, I know this dont apply to Windows 7, but I am sure all of this info
would work for 7 as well.... I just use Win98 by personal choice and
also have XP available.
Monty
2017-10-04 07:28:32 UTC
Permalink
Post by a***@internet.none
After being told about this program to assist in doing the cloning and
data recovery of my failed HDD, I did some looking up ddrescue. All I am
seeing is the Linux version, and worse yet, it requires doing it by the
command line. To me, this means I may as well just toss my failed drive
in the garbage and say goodbye to my data. I have never had any luck
with anything Linux, and if it involves the Linux command line, it's
time to "hang up the phone". On top of that, it appears that to even run
this thing means it needs to be burned to a DVD. That means I will first
have to buy a DVD burner, and blank media. NO THANKS!!!! (That DVD
burner would proably never be used again).
I cant believe there is not something similar that runs in Windows, or
even from Dos, which is just as good. I prefer to stay away from Linux
as far as possible. I will run anything that works on Win9x or WinXP, or
even DOS. (I am not afraid to use Dos command lines, because I was
raised on Dos).
So, what else is there? I'll even purchase commercial software if it's
not over $50. But what do I use?
I just cant believe there is nothing that runs on Windows or Dos, and
think it's sort of ridiculous to have to use Linux to fix a Windows
drive.
---
One other thing, according to Norton Disk Doctor (for Win9x), the FAT
table is defective. There is supposed to be a second copy of the FAT
table, How can I swap to the second copy, and is it possible to swap
back if that dont work?
Yes, I know this dont apply to Windows 7, but I am sure all of this info
would work for 7 as well.... I just use Win98 by personal choice and
also have XP available.
There a list of choices for Windows here:

https://alternativeto.net/software/ddrescue/?platform=windows
Paul
2017-10-04 11:20:34 UTC
Permalink
Post by a***@internet.none
After being told about this program to assist in doing the cloning and
data recovery of my failed HDD, I did some looking up ddrescue. All I am
seeing is the Linux version, and worse yet, it requires doing it by the
command line. To me, this means I may as well just toss my failed drive
in the garbage and say goodbye to my data. I have never had any luck
with anything Linux, and if it involves the Linux command line, it's
time to "hang up the phone". On top of that, it appears that to even run
this thing means it needs to be burned to a DVD. That means I will first
have to buy a DVD burner, and blank media. NO THANKS!!!! (That DVD
burner would proably never be used again).
I cant believe there is not something similar that runs in Windows, or
even from Dos, which is just as good. I prefer to stay away from Linux
as far as possible. I will run anything that works on Win9x or WinXP, or
even DOS. (I am not afraid to use Dos command lines, because I was
raised on Dos).
So, what else is there? I'll even purchase commercial software if it's
not over $50. But what do I use?
I just cant believe there is nothing that runs on Windows or Dos, and
think it's sort of ridiculous to have to use Linux to fix a Windows
drive.
---
One other thing, according to Norton Disk Doctor (for Win9x), the FAT
table is defective. There is supposed to be a second copy of the FAT
table, How can I swap to the second copy, and is it possible to swap
back if that dont work?
Yes, I know this dont apply to Windows 7, but I am sure all of this info
would work for 7 as well.... I just use Win98 by personal choice and
also have XP available.
I didn't know about the first answer here, until happening on it.
I've never had a disk fall into the gray zone, to test all
these utilities and spot this. When I have a (really) bad disk, it dies
before I can get any data off.

https://www.data-medics.com/forum/how-to-clone-a-hard-drive-with-bad-sectors-using-ddrescue-t133.html

"Why you can't clone in Windows:

There are a great number of Windows based data recovery and
backup programs out there which make claims of being able to
clone hard drives with bad sectors. This may be partly true, as
some employ bad sector skipping code to jump ahead a large number
of sectors when a bad sector is hit and attempt to continue.

However none are well suited to the task simply because all
Windows based applications rely on the Windows host controller
to interface with the drive. Currently there is no known
workaround for this in Windows. The Windows host controller
unfortunately does not allow software running in Windows to
directly control ATA commands issued to the drive (such as
read timeouts) which are necessary to effectively clone as much
data as possible from hard drive with bad sectors. Fortunately
there is another OS capable of running on your computer that
does not suffer from these same constraints...."

AFAIK, the disk drive itself can hold up the process for 15 seconds
per sector, unless you have a drive with TLER in which case the time
constant can be reduced to the 5 to 7 second range. The disk drive
will try a *ton* of times itself, to read a bad sector.

*******

http://www.cgsecurity.org/wiki/Advanced_FAT_Repair

"Repair FAT tables

File Allocation Tables are maps of the data region, indicating
which clusters are used by files and directories. To repair the
FAT, the menu Repair FAT will have TestDisk compare the two FAT
copies. If the FATs mismatch (sector by sector check) or contains
errors, *TestDisk* uses the FAT copy with less errors and removes
the obvious errors. This function must only be used on FAT
filesystems with correct values in the boot sector. It has been
used with success when scandisk, chkdsk or fsck.vfat crashed or
refused to repair the filesystem.
"

TestDisk 7 is available from that site, and runs in Windows.
For example, on partitions with the "hidden" attribute,
ones without drive letters like System Reserved, you can
use the "file listing" interface, to actually list the
contents of a hidden partition. The interface is a
bitch :-) Press "control-c" to quit at any time. You'll
eventually learn how to use it... somehow...

TestDisk is also on the Linux DVD.

*******

If you have a USB stick, one big enough to hold a 1.6GB Linux
ISO file, the recent distros are UEFI hybrids with direct dd
transfer capability. You can prepare a USB stick, just by
downloading a Linux distro and transferring it to the USB
stick, sector by sector.

http://www.chrysocome.net/dd

# This assumes the second drive seen in Windows is the USB stick.
# Harddisk0 is the first disk. Harddisk1 is the second disk etc.
# The block size should divide evenly into the size of the ISO.
# The ISOs were properly padded to 1MB (1048576) byte multiples,
# but newer ones are only guaranteed to be a multiple of the optical
# disk sector size of 2048 bytes. I use "factor.exe" to factor the
# size number and work out an optimal block size.

dd if=c:\temp\linux.iso of=\\?\Device\Harddisk1\Partition0 bs=2048

That's to illustrate you *can* prepare Linux boot materials
from Windows. No CD needed (except on year 2005 computers or older,
that don't boot from USB).

http://www.chrysocome.net/downloads/dd-0.6beta3.zip

There are other tools for preparing boot USBs.

*******

For certain classes of disk problems, you have to
drop to *real DOS*. Count your lucky stars that
Linux, with GUI convenience, exists for at least some
of the problems you might encounter as an amateur
data recovery specialist. One of my problems is,
getting my DOS floppy to boot on modern computers.
It's almost impossible (can't figure out how to
modify memory map to make it fully functional).
It took a lot of trials on my Asrock 4Core to make
that work, but I eventually stumbled on the correct
values. I haven't been as lucky on newer kit.

HTH,
Paul

Char Jackson
2017-09-29 14:33:45 UTC
Permalink
Post by Paul
Post by a***@internet.none
What can I use to retrieve the data?
Google told me to download PC Inspector. I tried it, it ran in Win98,
but everytime I go to G: it errors out.
What else is there? I'd prefer free, but will pay a reasonable fee for
something guaranteed to work.
ddrescue (Linux package "gddrescue") can clone a failing
drive to a new drive.
+1

ddrescue did a great job for me awhile back when I had a couple of
crashed drives.
--
Char Jackson
philo
2017-09-29 19:03:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by Paul
Post by a***@internet.none
I have an old computer with two 120gb IDE HDDs. The first drive has 4
partitions C: thru F:. The second HDD has 3 partitions G: thru I:.
The computer is running Windows 98 SE. (Yea, I know this is a Windows 7
newsgroup, but the Win98 group is dead).
Anyhow, my G: partition has gone insane. This started when I was backing
it up, and it refused to copy some files. I ran scandisk and told me
there were 2 bad clusters, but could not fix them. Rather than just
marking them as BAD, it made the whole HDD go insane.
First it created several folders called DIR0000 DIR0001 etc.
Then I found several folders missing, but the contents of some of them
were in these DIR000X folders.
It told me to run the complete (long) version of Scandisk. I did it, and
after taking hours, it told me there were 2 bad clusters in UNUSED
spaces, and said they could not be fixed.
Rather than just mark them clusters bad, I Then found over half of my
folders missing. However, in DOS, I can see them, but found I can only
copy small files, large ones cause ABORT RETRY FAIL.
This partition is about 50gb, with 23gb used. It's formatted FAT32.
The entire drive is not bad. H: and I: work fine. Just G: is screwed up.
I have not run further tests, which might write to the drive. My goal is
to retrieve the very important data to another drive. (I only have about
half of that partition backed up). Once I can save the data, I plan to
also save the data on the other partitions, and will replace the drive
with a new one.
What can I use to retrieve the data?
Google told me to download PC Inspector. I tried it, it ran in Win98,
but everytime I go to G: it errors out.
What else is there? I'd prefer free, but will pay a reasonable fee for
something guaranteed to work.The lost data is around 12gb, but it's
extremely important. If I must, I will probably have to pay a pro for
data recovery.
Because this is a slave drive, I can plug it into a XP computer if need
be, but will need some special card or something, because that computer
has a SATA drive. I dont know if I am better trying to retrieve the data
using Win98 or XP????
I dont have any newer OSs, than XP.
Win98 is what I use the most, and this W98 computer has all my most
important data. I only use XP to play videos.
ddrescue (Linux package "gddrescue") can clone a failing
drive to a new drive.
Then switching back to Windows, either Photorec or Recuva
can be used for file recovery. Copying the recovered files
to a separate drive.
That takes a total of two hard drives. One for the clone copy.
One for the recovered files. You do *not ever* try writing
to G: , the instant it shows trouble. And repair-in-place
utilities, can do more damage than they fix on a sick
drive.
And PC Inspector is the same as the free version of driverescue.
So there's no point trying that one.
I like to clone, as the first step, just in case the drive
is about to fail. I've had two Maxtor drives, that augered
into the ground in only 24 hours. They gave symptoms, then
within the next 24 hours, the drive would no longer ID. And
the neat thing was, one drive "lost" its ID in mid-flight.
It went from a 40GB drive to a 10GB drive, while I was
watching it.
http://www.cgsecurity.org/wiki/Damaged_Hard_Disk
   # From a Linux LiveCD, use the package manager to install gddrescue
   sudo ddrescue -n /dev/old_disk /dev/new_disk rescued.log
What happens on the first pass, is the program tries to copy
as many sectors as it can. The "rescued.log" file keeps
track of which sectors it got. Then, when you run a
command like this...
   sudo ddrescue -r 1 /dev/old_disk /dev/new_disk rescued.log
it does one retry per failed sector (potentially a 15 second
delay comes from the disk when it tries to read a bad sector).
The rescued.log file tells the program which sectors are still
needed. So it's a gradual copy process, and the rescued.log
contains the status of the operation.
When you're sick of running the second command, then you
stop and do data recovery using /dev/new_disk. That's
when you run Photorec or Recuva, and transfer the
files to a second known-good disk drive.
A data recovery firm could have better luck, than an
attempted home recovery. And you have to weigh the
price of that, versus the value of the data. Professional
data recovery, you only pay if data is recovered. For
example, if I'd send my 2GB Barracuda drive, the one with
the big scratch in the platter, I wouldn't have had
to pay a dime :-( If a head falls off the head stack,
sometimes they can install a new head stack, and get
some data off. Yours doesn't have that problem, and
your problem is likely surface damage.
Note - the syntax of the above commands is for illustration
of the concept. Use
   man ddrescue
to double check the syntax and then craft your command.
I don't know if anyone has ported ddrescue to Windows.
Environments like Cygwin, sometimes the people doing the
ports, have a lot of trouble doing low-level access to the
drives. And so expecting a port of a program like that. The
closest thing to drive cloning we have on Windows, is
this one. But this one is for cloning *healthy* disks.
The beauty of ddrescue, is getting a CRC error doesn't
stop it. It keeps trying. Many other utilities, will
exit on the first failure. Again, this is to illustrate
we do have utilities. But, we don't have everything
on Windows, and when you're desperate, you'll be
"shopping around" for stuff to do the work.
http://www.chrysocome.net/dd
I can count the number of times people have successfully
recovered data off a hard drive, on one hand. If you can
afford the data recovery company, and the data is important,
that's a better option. And a data recovery company cannot
perform miracles. For my 2GB Barracuda drive, with the
scratched platter, they can't "buff out the scratch".
It doesn't work that way. The gouge would ruin a new
head stack if one was installed, so even if they were
dumb enough to try, it would just fail to work. The
heads would be destroyed in about 10 revolutions of
the platter (heads load and "crunch" noise less
than a second later).
   Paul
This is good advice but I figure the longer one uses a failing drive the
worse it gets...so I do nothing with it other than run data recovery
software.
Paul
2017-09-29 19:29:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by philo
This is good advice but I figure the longer one uses a failing drive the
worse it gets...so I do nothing with it other than run data recovery
software.
Well, I clone first, and try to use "linear" processes that
don't shake the heads around. "dd" is linear.

Not that it makes a difference. The drive will drop dead,
any time it feels like. Thus, me losing a Maxtor in mid-session
(it can no longer find the service area). It doesn't even know
it's Maxtor and calls itself Falcon. After the power is
removed, it does no more cameo appearances.

Paul
philo
2017-09-29 19:32:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by Paul
Post by philo
This is good advice but I figure the longer one uses a failing drive
the worse it gets...so I do nothing with it other than run data
recovery software.
Well, I clone first, and try to use "linear" processes that
don't shake the heads around. "dd" is linear.
Not that it makes a difference. The drive will drop dead,
any time it feels like. Thus, me losing a Maxtor in mid-session
(it can no longer find the service area). It doesn't even know
it's Maxtor and calls itself Falcon. After the power is
removed, it does no more cameo appearances.
   Paul
All I know is for Fat32 not to even try scandisk...It can write the
whole drive to useless chk files.

CHKDSK /F on an NTFS drive has done wonders though
Paul
2017-09-29 22:40:57 UTC
Permalink
Post by philo
Post by Paul
Post by philo
This is good advice but I figure the longer one uses a failing drive
the worse it gets...so I do nothing with it other than run data
recovery software.
Well, I clone first, and try to use "linear" processes that
don't shake the heads around. "dd" is linear.
Not that it makes a difference. The drive will drop dead,
any time it feels like. Thus, me losing a Maxtor in mid-session
(it can no longer find the service area). It doesn't even know
it's Maxtor and calls itself Falcon. After the power is
removed, it does no more cameo appearances.
Paul
All I know is for Fat32 not to even try scandisk...It can write the
whole drive to useless chk files.
CHKDSK /F on an NTFS drive has done wonders though
CHKDSK and Scandisk are "write in place" utilities.
Great if they do something positive. Not so great
if they crap all over the partition.

There have been cases, where the real cause of a disk
problem was that the IDE cable was loose and not
seated. A user runs CHKDSK in such a situation, and
*every* write done, is corrupting things. After the
run is complete, there's nothing left to recover.

That's why you have to be real careful with those utilities,
in terms of hardware health. They're only reasonable things
to do if the storage is 100% and there are no signs of
trouble.

If you have questions about a partition, like say you've
seen some real strange things happening, and want to reach
for the CHKDSK, your first step should be a backup.

If a volume needs CHKDSK right now, then conventional backup
software won't work. It'll attempt its own consistency check
and fail the disk, and refuse to backup.

That's when you use "dd" and do a sector by sector backup.
It's best to do that from Linux, because no Windows C: system files
will be "busy" if you dd from Linux.

And if that doesn't work, you use ddrescue (gddrescue package)
in Linux, and do it from a Linux LiveCD. That can work, even
if a couple sectors throw CRC errors.

Running CHKDSK/Scandisk is not recommended in all situations.
If you think your IDE cable is loose, definitely don't run it.

I'm surprised more people don't back up, given the
dangerous times we live in (WannaCrypt or equiv).

Paul
philo
2017-09-30 02:11:45 UTC
Permalink
Post by Paul
Post by philo
Post by Paul
Post by philo
This is good advice but I figure the longer one uses a failing drive
the worse it gets...so I do nothing with it other than run data
recovery software.
Well, I clone first, and try to use "linear" processes that
don't shake the heads around. "dd" is linear.
Not that it makes a difference. The drive will drop dead,
any time it feels like. Thus, me losing a Maxtor in mid-session
(it can no longer find the service area). It doesn't even know
it's Maxtor and calls itself Falcon. After the power is
removed, it does no more cameo appearances.
    Paul
All I know is for Fat32 not to even try scandisk...It can write the
whole drive to useless chk files.
CHKDSK /F on an NTFS drive has done wonders though
CHKDSK and Scandisk are "write in place" utilities.
Great if they do something positive. Not so great
if they crap all over the partition.
There have been cases, where the real cause of a disk
problem was that the IDE cable was loose and not
seated. A user runs CHKDSK in such a situation, and
*every* write done, is corrupting things. After the
run is complete, there's nothing left to recover.
That's why you have to be real careful with those utilities,
in terms of hardware health. They're only reasonable things
to do if the storage is 100% and there are no signs of
trouble.
If you have questions about a partition, like say you've
seen some real strange things happening, and want to reach
for the CHKDSK, your first step should be a backup.
If a volume needs CHKDSK right now, then conventional backup
software won't work. It'll attempt its own consistency check
and fail the disk, and refuse to backup.
That's when you use "dd" and do a sector by sector backup.
It's best to do that from Linux, because no Windows C: system files
will be "busy" if you dd from Linux.
And if that doesn't work, you use ddrescue (gddrescue package)
in Linux, and do it from a Linux LiveCD. That can work, even
if a couple sectors throw CRC errors.
Running CHKDSK/Scandisk is not recommended in all situations.
If you think your IDE cable is loose, definitely don't run it.
I'm surprised more people don't back up, given the
dangerous times we live in (WannaCrypt or equiv).
   Paul
Yep, you are absolutely right.


At at rate I have my stuff backed up numerous times
Char Jackson
2017-09-30 06:55:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by Paul
I'm surprised more people don't back up, given the
dangerous times we live in (WannaCrypt or equiv).
My goal, not always achieved, is to create a full backup of each PC at
least once a year. My latest backups are dated from February 2016, so
last year is covered and I have just three months to get a 2017 backup
set churned out.

I'm not recommending my backup strategy to others.
--
Char Jackson
Ant
2017-10-02 02:41:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by Char Jackson
Post by Paul
I'm surprised more people don't back up, given the
dangerous times we live in (WannaCrypt or equiv).
My goal, not always achieved, is to create a full backup of each PC at
least once a year. My latest backups are dated from February 2016, so
last year is covered and I have just three months to get a 2017 backup
set churned out.
I'm not recommending my backup strategy to others.
Once a year? That's like really old if you had to restore before that
annual backup. ;) For me, I do it monthly. For every other days and/or
weekly, I do my data backups (stuff that can't be recovered).
--
Quote of the Week: "Yeah, what's left of it. I was in the militia --
national guard... That's good! Wasn't any war any more than there's war
between men and ants." --stranger; "And we're eat-able ants. I found
that out... What will they do with us?" --Pierson from H.G. Wells' The
War of the Worlds
Note: A fixed width font (Courier, Monospace, etc.) is required to see this signature correctly.
/\___/\ Ant(Dude) @ http://antfarm.ma.cx (Personal Web Site)
/ /\ /\ \ Ant's Quality Foraged Links: http://aqfl.net
| |o o| |
\ _ / Please nuke ANT if replying by e-mail privately. If credit-
( ) ing, then please kindly use Ant nickname and AQFL URL/link.
Andy
2017-10-02 07:16:18 UTC
Permalink
My back ups are monthly with the rest done daily:)
--
AL'S COMPUTERS
Post by Ant
Post by Char Jackson
Post by Paul
I'm surprised more people don't back up, given the
dangerous times we live in (WannaCrypt or equiv).
My goal, not always achieved, is to create a full backup of each PC at
least once a year. My latest backups are dated from February 2016, so
last year is covered and I have just three months to get a 2017 backup
set churned out.
I'm not recommending my backup strategy to others.
Once a year? That's like really old if you had to restore before that
annual backup. ;) For me, I do it monthly. For every other days and/or
weekly, I do my data backups (stuff that can't be recovered).
--
Quote of the Week: "Yeah, what's left of it. I was in the militia --
national guard... That's good! Wasn't any war any more than there's war
between men and ants." --stranger; "And we're eat-able ants. I found
that out... What will they do with us?" --Pierson from H.G. Wells' The
War of the Worlds
Note: A fixed width font (Courier, Monospace, etc.) is required to see
this signature correctly.
/ /\ /\ \ Ant's Quality Foraged Links: http://aqfl.net
| |o o| |
\ _ / Please nuke ANT if replying by e-mail privately. If credit-
( ) ing, then please kindly use Ant nickname and AQFL URL/link.
J. P. Gilliver (John)
2017-09-29 13:20:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by a***@internet.none
I have an old computer with two 120gb IDE HDDs. The first drive has 4
partitions C: thru F:. The second HDD has 3 partitions G: thru I:.
The computer is running Windows 98 SE. (Yea, I know this is a Windows 7
newsgroup, but the Win98 group is dead).
Quiet, but not dead, assuming you mean the one I've included.
Post by a***@internet.none
Anyhow, my G: partition has gone insane. This started when I was backing
it up, and it refused to copy some files. I ran scandisk and told me
What are you using to backup - just copy, or some utility? Does it stop
when it encounters a problem, or carry on with the remaining files it
_can_ copy? (I use SyncToy, but [a] I don't know if that runs on '98 [b]
I don't know if it carries on after a failure-to-read, though I think it
does.)
Post by a***@internet.none
there were 2 bad clusters, but could not fix them. Rather than just
marking them as BAD, it made the whole HDD go insane.
It may or may not be scandisk that made that happen.
Post by a***@internet.none
First it created several folders called DIR0000 DIR0001 etc.
Then I found several folders missing, but the contents of some of them
were in these DIR000X folders.
Yes, that's what it does: if it can't read the name of a folder, it
makes one called DIRxxxx, and puts the contents of the unreadable folder
into the new one.
Post by a***@internet.none
It told me to run the complete (long) version of Scandisk. I did it, and
after taking hours, it told me there were 2 bad clusters in UNUSED
I'm guessing that the first pass did its moving into rescue folders, so
the bad ones were indeed now in unused space. However, that's just a
guess.
Post by a***@internet.none
spaces, and said they could not be fixed.
Well, if they were unfixable the first time, they'd be unfixable the
second. IIRR, the default pass just looks at used space and file
structures, so it's pot luck that the dud sectors were in a part of the
disk where you did have data, and it thus found them. The long version
checks the whole disk, including the parts currently not holding any
data: basically I think for each sector, it copies the data, then does
write and read tests, then puts back the original data. (Moving it to
somewhere else if it detects a problem.)
Post by a***@internet.none
Rather than just mark them clusters bad, I Then found over half of my
folders missing. However, in DOS, I can see them, but found I can only
copy small files, large ones cause ABORT RETRY FAIL.
Does sound as if the drive is decidedly unwell. The symptoms - can see
in DOS but not Windows - sound remarkably like another thread I've read
in the last day or two; I think it was/is in the '98 'group.
Post by a***@internet.none
This partition is about 50gb, with 23gb used. It's formatted FAT32.
The entire drive is not bad. H: and I: work fine. Just G: is screwed up.
I wouldn't (as you've said you aren't going to, which is good policy)
rely on the rest of it remaining good, though.
Post by a***@internet.none
I have not run further tests, which might write to the drive. My goal is
to retrieve the very important data to another drive. (I only have about
half of that partition backed up). Once I can save the data, I plan to
also save the data on the other partitions, and will replace the drive
with a new one.
(Good.)
Post by a***@internet.none
What can I use to retrieve the data?
Google told me to download PC Inspector. I tried it, it ran in Win98,
but everytime I go to G: it errors out.
Does it work on H: and I:, i. e. the other parts of the same drive?
Post by a***@internet.none
What else is there? I'd prefer free, but will pay a reasonable fee for
something guaranteed to work.The lost data is around 12gb, but it's
extremely important. If I must, I will probably have to pay a pro for
data recovery.
You were backing up - how often do you? [Not that I'm one to talk (-:!]
Also, what is it that is making such important data, that is running
under '98? (Not that '98 is in itself unreliable: it's so simple that
it's probably _more_ reliable. It's just that kit made for it is
probably getting a bit worn by now ...)
Post by a***@internet.none
Because this is a slave drive, I can plug it into a XP computer if need
be, but will need some special card or something, because that computer
The motherboard may still have an IDE connector, though. (Are you sure
you're not the same person as the other thread?) SATA-_only_
motherboards, I would say, didn't become _common_ until after the XP era
(I'm not sure they're _that_ common even yet).
Post by a***@internet.none
has a SATA drive. I dont know if I am better trying to retrieve the data
using Win98 or XP????
For a secondary (i. e. not system) drive, I think '98 is less likely to
try to write anything _to_ the drive; conversely, XP might do better,
and there are probably more tools.
Post by a***@internet.none
I dont have any newer OSs, than XP.
Win98 is what I use the most, and this W98 computer has all my most
important data. I only use XP to play videos.
On reading that, I've added the XP 'group, as those there might
recommend assorted utilities. This probably shouldn't be on the '7
'group (-:.
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)***@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

Speed has never killed anyone. Suddenly becoming stationary, that's what gets
you. - Jeremy Clarkson, Top Gear
Continue reading on narkive:
Loading...